Bearlegdairy wrote: denisea wrote:
1st of all, there must be better things for you two to do than come on here to a thread that's meant to UPLIFT people instead of harping about not getting into a law school b/c some URM got it over you.
2nd of all, my boyfriend is Nigerian and has experienced MORE discrimination in the U.S than in Nigeria and as a black woman who studied in Ghana, I have experienced racism, there and here. Trying to compare levels of discrimination is crazy. Racism is racism.
3rd of all, if you knew anything, admissions last year for URM's were DECLINING so all this crap about stealing your spots is BS. Maybe you should worry about making your own application stronger or devoting your time to helping others instead of tearing people down. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/07/education/07law.html
4th of all, its so easy to get on a thread and talk mess but I'm pretty sure IF you do get to law school and see URM's in your class, you'll be all fake smiles in their faces and no mention of the complaints you've lodged here.
Needless to say, I'm tired of people saying I got into ANY law school based on being URM. NO. Myself and others got in because we are AMAZING people who worked hard to get here and that goes for all who got in, URM's, white, men, women, lower class or rich.
You can reply, whatever, get mad. I don't care. I'm GOING to top tier law school and so are other URM's so say what you want. We're IN and there' s nothing you're complaining will do about that.
Well, I'm not entirely sure if the thread was meant to uplift as much as simply a "Yay! I didn't expect this!" "Uplift," implies that there is something inspiring or a lesson to be learned, usually about human dignity or perseverance or some such thing. Most of the posts I saw were not of that nature. But let's not quibble over over semantics.
In no way was this discussion intended to "tear you down." You have decent numbers and earned your place in a law school. None of us have an issue with that. Did your URM status help your application and your chances of getting in? Most likely. It would be intellectually dishonest to suggest otherwise. But given what you've indicated in your post, it SHOULD factor into the decision of whether or not to admit you.
The effects racism can have on a population really don't need to be described at length. I'm sure most of us are Americans and are all conscious of our nation's history of slavery, segregation, discrimination against women, Asians, Latinos, etc. Every American is aware of the fact that the federal, state, and local governments, public schools, private industry, virtually every level of society has at some point in our history contributed to the oppression of women, LGBTs, and ethnic and religious minorities, and any example of this, no matter how small, is indefensible.
But societies change over time and our institutions, law schools included, must change with them. The URM program and "affirmative action" as a whole, are examples of necessary change. In the 1960s, one would be hard pressed to find a black child in the North that had not been target of overt racial prejudice, to say nothing of the Deep South. Generations of blacks had been enslaved and been given no access to even the most rudimentary means of education. Lifting up a race of people from so many years of oppression would be a daunting task, to say the least, which was one of the reasons that affirmative action policies were put into place.
But 50 years later, things have changed considerably. Everyone here has likely had a black professor; we have had black generals, cabinet secretaries, Supreme Court justices, and, of course, a black president. While many, if not most, blacks are still subject to discrimination on a daily basis, a significant number have attained a degree of equity with whites, and it is when this happens that questions must be raised. The poor black child who grew up in the inner city has obviously experienced great hardships and, however well he or she may have done in school or on the LSAT, those numbers likely would have been better had the same brain been placed in the body of a middle-class white child. In these cases, allowing them the competitive advantage of URM status is absolutely appropriate.
When we are considering the child of, for example, a black doctor and a black attorney, who went to a good school and grew up in a loving family, things become more complicated. Does that child have a competitive disadvantage against, say, an impoverished white child in a single-parent household? That's up for debate. The fact that people are asking questions about the legitimacy of applying URM status based solely on the race of an individual and what of what percentage of the community that race compromises is not an indicator of racial prejudice or anger about one's own denial from a law school, but rather a sign of the advancement of a minority group in society and whether or not that group NEEDS the competitive advantage that comes with URM status.
You've probably noticed that many applicants have emphasized their LGBT status, and that is absolutely appropriate in 2011. But given the social progress we have witnessed over even the last 10 years or so, will that still matter in, say, 50 years? 100? Or will sexual preference simply no longer be the subject of controversy by that time?
These discussions have nothing to do with you or any other URM applicant posting on this forum. The politics of race remains extremely complicated to this day and will likely remain so. You've earned your spot in a law school. You should be proud of that and no one begrudges you for your admission. These discussions are merely an extension of the dialogue which will and should occur about the continued relevance of the application of the URM label. Hopefully some day it will no longer be necessary. Obviously that day has not come, but we would do ourselves a disservice by not bestowing the URM label only on those who need it to ensure that the admissions process is as fair as it can possibly be.
And, believe it or not, I don't have anything better to do than arguing on the internet.